can be used in advertising and promotional materials,

protected by the First Amendment and New York state law.

This sets a significant precedent.

A federal appeals court found that opinions about scientific studies,

at least when two private parties are involved in cases involving the Lanham Act,

is protected free speech.

If you say that a food is healthy and may help protect against heart disease, diabetes, or arthritis,

your words have magically changed that food into a drug.

And, guess what, that’s illegal.

Now you’ve created an illegal drug and that’s a crime

Free Speech Win For Scientific Conclusions in Federal Court

So why after all these years have we not shared all that great research about how food and nutrition can impact public health, access to food and opportunity as well as workforce development? Where are we today? Take a look at the disruption in our food sector. Amazon buying Whole Foods and thousands of small scale rural and urban growers building local food systems.

In this case, the manufacturer of a lung surfactant—a detergent-like agent that reduces the surface tension of the liquid film covering the inner lining of the lung’s small air sacs (alveoli) to help keep lungs from collapsing and help patients breathe better—brought a false advertising suit against a competitor.

The lawsuit alleged that the competitor paid for research designed to show that the competitor’s product was superior; that the findings were false and deceptive; and that the competitor disseminated those findings through an article published in a scientific journal and through promotional material citing the article’s conclusions.

The plaintiff didn’t claim that the competitor distorted the article’s findings, but that the findings themselves were inaccurate, and by publishing them, the plaintiffs suffered damage.

The main question was whether the defendant’s statements about the study were false and misleading under the Lanham Act, which is the primary federal trademark law in the US (the court also looked at this under NY state law).

They didn’t consider the question of whether the study findings themselves were false—only whether their statements about the study were false or misleading. The panel ruled against the plaintiff and found that the defendant did not misrepresent the research findings, and ruled the defendant’s statements to be scientific “opinion,” not fact, and therefore protected speech under the First Amendment.

This sets a significant precedent. A federal appeals court found that opinions about scientific studies, at least when two private parties are involved in cases involving the Lanham Act, is protected free speech.

Increasingly, the FTC appears to be applying the FDA’s pharmaceutical approach toward all health claims, including those for food or supplements, via consent decrees, as we discussed last year. These consent decrees are requiring manufacturers to obtain the FDA’s approval of any health claims prior to making them in advertising, and are insisting on a standard of double random controlled studies. In effect, the FTC seems to be doing what the FDA itself would like to do but is barred from doing. It seems to be an end-run around FDA law.

Given this background of increasing government censorship of science, this latest court ruling is very welcome. Companies cannot afford the millions of dollars needed to take a natural, non-patentable product through the FDA drug approval process in order to establish health claims. However, there is a lot of valid scientific literature explaining benefits of natural products, and companies should be able to use it for advertising purposes to inform the public without threat of fines or even jail.

This was the logic behind our push for Free Speech About Science (FSAS). A bill to reintroduce the Free Speech About Science Act is currently being redrafted. We will keep you posted as things. A resurrection is long overdue.

Is The FDA Losing It’s Mind?

Here’s an example from recent history that speaks to how far certain interests will go to separate us from our food. Before any science came along to validate the idea that food is the key driver to human health and development.

Why is it that after the scientific validation for nutrition, vitamins, minerals, amino acids, as the building blocks for all life, and that they comprise our food, why wouldn’t that story be worth shouting from the rooftops?

What if the foods we all eat got to tell it’s nutritional bona fides as medicine? Or, at the very least, beneficial and highly recommended for health and wellness. Thanks to CathyBurt at TimberJay.com for the alert on the FDA losing it’s mind.

The FDA Wants To Make Cherries, Walnuts Into Illegal Drugs

The FDA has sent a warning letter to the president and CEO of Diamond Foods stating that the firm’s packages of shelled walnuts are “in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”. Why? Because Diamond Foods dared to list some of the health benefits of walnuts on its website. Health benefits which have been scientifically researched and proven. The FDA says that the walnuts are being “promoted for conditions that cause them to be drugs because these products are intended for use in the prevention, mitigation and treatment of disease”.

In other words, if you say that a food is healthy and may help protect against heart disease, diabetes, or arthritis, your words have magically changed that food into a drug. And, guess what, that’s illegal. Now you’ve created an illegal drug and that’s a crime

Common sense alone should tell you that walnuts, cherries, pomegranates and green tea are foods, not drugs.

Even though potato chips are mostly a deep fried snack food, with no scientifically proven health benefits, the FDA has no problem with FritoLay listing on its website some of what they claim are the health benefits of potato chips. We all know that carbohydrates fried in fat and covered with salt are just not healthy to eat. Plus they definitely won’t give you the GMO Free certification to go along with all their other nutritional needs products. Can anyone say “Gluten Free” ?

This certainly seems like a FDA double standard and it is just not acceptable for a government agency to disregard its own mission of educating the public and promoting health.

The Free Speech about Science Act (HR 4913) was a bipartisan bill introduced into the House of Representatives on March 23, 2010. This legislation protects basic free speech rights, ends censorship of science and enables the natural foods and health products community to share peer-reviewed scientific findings with the public. The bill had the potential to educate the public about the real science behind natural health. This would have enabled the public to have access to credible information that they can use to make wise dietary choices. It died. It was reintroduced and it died again.

Just let us know within 30 days.

We’ll refund your money,

No questions asked.

You keep the Report.

If you say that a food is healthy and may help protect against heart disease, diabetes, or arthritis,

your words have magically changed that food into a drug.

And, guess what, that’s illegal.

Now you’ve created an illegal drug and that’s a crime.

Looks Like Somebody At the FDA Has Lost All Common Sense

Here’s a reminder about how far some will go to keep us separated from the full story about our food. Thanks to CathyBurt at TimberJay.com for the alert on the FDA losing it’s mind.

The FDA has sent a warning letter to the president and CEO of Diamond Foods stating that the firm’s packages of shelled walnuts are “in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”. Why?

Because Diamond Foods dared to list some of the health benefits of walnuts on its website. Health benefits which have been scientifically researched and proven. The FDA says that the walnuts are being “promoted for conditions that cause them to be drugs because these products are intended for use in the prevention, mitigation and treatment of disease”.

In other words, if you say that a food is healthy and may help protect against heart disease, diabetes, or arthritis, your words have magically changed that food into a drug. And, guess what, that’s illegal. Now you’ve created an illegal drug and that’s a crime

Common sense alone should tell you that walnuts, cherries, pomegranates and green tea are foods, not drugs.

Even though potato chips are mostly a deep fried snack food, with no scientifically proven health benefits, the FDA has no problem with FritoLay listing on its website some of what they claim are the health benefits of potato chips. We all know that carbohydrates fried in fat and covered with salt are just not healthy to eat. Plus, you find any mention of GMO Free on the many product options they have to satisfy consumer health concerns.

This certainly seems like a FDA double standard and it is just not acceptable for a government agency to disregard its own mission of educating the public and promoting health.

The Free Speech about Science Act (HR 4913) was a bipartisan bill introduced into the House of Representatives on March 23, 2010. This legislation would have protected basic free speech rights, ending censorship of science and enabling the natural foods and health products community to share peer-reviewed scientific findings with the public.

The bill had the potential to educate the public about the real science behind natural health. This would have enabled the public to have access to credible information that they can use to make wise dietary choices. It died. It was reintroduced. It died again.

Perhaps big food is a little spooked right now. Consumer awareness about their food is outstripping companies’ ability to obscure the full story about what we eat. As a result, markets are rapidly changing to higher nutritional value foods. Whether snacking or dining, the story is spreading and that’s how we’re going to get what we want – a clean, sustainable, healthy and delicious food supply.

Just let us know within 30 days.

We’ll refund your money,

No questions asked.

You keep the Report.

School’s in session and more kids are learning, growing, and playing fueled by good-tasting whole grains!

Lately, there have been big wins in the movement to improve school lunches, and Community Grains is proud to be doing their part.

Oakland Unified School District has decided to go all in with Community Grains’ California-grown, 100% whole grain pastas,now on cafeteria lunch menus in 85 Oakland public schools!

And in yet another fantastic move, OUSD is set to adopt a Good Food Purchasing Policy — a purchasing standard that demonstrates its commitment to better sourcing, sustainability, fair labor, and quality whole foods.

Sweeteners are hard to escape. It’s also hard to escape the health consequences of becoming overly reliant on a substance that apparently, not enough of us are yet aware is killing us slowly.

Half Of Americans Sweet On The Perils Of Sugar

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, recent statistics show half of Americans drink a soda or sugary beverage each day. We have gulped our way to a new milestone in that they include both adults and kids. So much for leading by example.

The American Diabetes Association’s Scientific Sessions suggest that drinking diet soda may be doing more harm than good.

Not to worry, researchers are working on an i–phone app to use with a tattoo that monitors glucose and sodium levels. Watch for more techno-bio feedback tools to learn appropriate healthy behaviors.

Researchers at Northeastern University are working on nano sensors tattooed under the skin. The sensors change shade, red for sodium and yellow for glucose. Not ready for humans just yet, but as they say, awareness is the first step to enlightenment. Measuring for it keeps us headed in the right direction. Hopefully we’ll get the message by the time it becomes a life and death matter,

Look at the labels of any packaged or processed food product. Sweeteners are hard to escape. It’s also hard to escape the health consequences of becoming overly reliant on a substance that apparently, not enough of us are yet aware of we all know is killing us slowly.Maybe the perils of sugar will become obvious to all of us. How about we stop subsidizing GMO corn processed high fructose corn syrup.

Oakland, CA — A new study published today in PLOS Medicine by the Public Health Institute and the University of North Carolina showed that Berkeley’s sugar sweetened beverage tax is working as intended.

Top findings included:

Purchases of sugary drinks declined: Sales (in ounces per transaction) of taxed SSBs fell by 9.6% in Berkeley, while they rose by 6% in other Bay Area stores without a tax (compared to predicted sales based on pre-tax trends). Sales of diet soft drinks and diet energy drinks also fell significantly, by 9.2%.

Purchases of healthy beverages increased: Sales of untaxed healthier beverages, already far greater at baseline, rose significantly, by 3.5%, and overall beverage sales went up in Berkeley. Sales of water rose by 15.6% (more in ounces than the decline in SSBs); untaxed fruit, vegetable or tea drink sales increased by 4.37%; and sales of plain milk rose by 0.63% (all statistically significant).

No negative impact on store revenue or consumer grocery bills: Although overall store revenues per transaction in the studied chains dropped slightly across the Bay Area during the study period, store revenues in Berkeley fell by 18¢ less (-$0.36) compared to non-Berkeley stores (-$0.54). This same indicator—store revenue per transaction—is also what consumers spent on average for each checkout or “grocery bill” at the participating stores, indicating that their average grocery checkout bill did not increase at these stores—counter to claims by the soda industry that the policy would be a “grocery tax.”

Investments in health increased: In spite of low consumption of SSBs, the City’s revenue from the first year of the SSB tax was $1,416,973—or $12 per capita. Funds raised went to nutrition and obesity prevention activities in schools, childcare and other community settings.

The tax costs were passed through to taxed products in many, but not all, stores: In the 15.5 million transaction study, about two-thirds of the penny-per-ounce levy (0.67¢/oz) was passed through to consumers by pricing increases on the taxed drinks. For soda and energy drinks it was fully passed through (1.09¢/oz). In the 26 store study, it was fully passed on in large (1.07¢/oz) and small chain supermarkets and chain gas stations (1.31¢/oz), partially in pharmacies (0.45¢/oz), but not in smaller independent corner stores and independent gas stations. Prices on non-taxed beverages did not increase more in Berkeley than in comparison stores.